RFID and NFC Systems Patents: Who Leads, Where Filings Cool 2026
- Filing has cooled since its 2019 peak. 141 families in 2019 against 132 in 2017 and a partial-year 7 in 2026 mark a plateau, not a growth curve — claim space in core read-range and anti-collision methods is largely staked out.
- Momentum has stalled even among named leaders. Several of the most active historical assignees show zero families in the latest year, and the one still filing is down 67% year-on-year — a sign of consolidation rather than fresh entry.
- Data recognition claims dominate by a wide margin. G06K accounts for 2,646 of 2,807 records, dwarfing antenna (H01Q, 421) and transmission (H04B, 555) subclasses — hardware-adjacent claims are comparatively open.
Filing growth compares 2021 (94 records) with 2024 (68) — a three-year span. 2024 is the most recent year we treat as complete: publication lags filing by roughly 18 months, so 2025 onwards are still filling in and any growth rate that ends there would understate the field. Top-5 share is the combined record count of the five largest assignees divided by all 2,807 records in scope (CR5), not by the ranked leaders only.
What this landscape covers
This landscape tracks patent families published between 2015 and mid-2026 that combine RFID system, NFC technology or RFID tag language in the title or abstract with technical claim terms such as read range, anti-collision, chipless tag, antenna detuning and energy harvesting tag, filtered to IPC classes G06K7, G06K19 and H04B5. The corpus totals 2,807 published records, each treated as one family for ranking purposes.
Filing activity by publication year understates the most recent period because examination and publication typically lag filing by around 18 months; treat the 2026 figure as a floor, not a ceiling. The receiving-office split — led by the United States, followed by the EPO, WIPO/PCT and China — points to where applicants have historically sought the broadest protection first.
Filing trend and technology composition
Two views of the same dataset: how filing volume moved year over year, and how the 2,807 records split across the IPC subclasses that define the field's technical boundaries.
A plateau, not a growth story
From 132 families in 2017 to a peak of 141 in 2019, then down through a 2022 midpoint of 76 to a partial 7 in 2026, the trend line reads as flat-to-declining once the publication lag is accounted for. New entrants are filing into a field where the dominant claim territory is already occupied.
Data recognition claims crowd out everything else
G06K (data recognition and presentation) touches 2,646 of the 2,807 records — effectively the whole corpus — while H04B (transmission, 555), H01Q (antennas, 421) and G08B (signalling and alarms, 416) trail well behind. G06Q (business/commerce data processing, 247), H04Q (switching, 226), G06F (digital data processing, 137) and H04L (digital transmission, 124) show the field's adjacent applications rather than its technical core.
Shares are the percentage of the 2,807 records in scope. A patent can carry several IPC classes, so the shares add up to more than 100%.
Go deeper on RFID and NFC Systems with Eureka
This page is one run against one query. Ask Eureka your own question about rfid and nfc systems and every answer comes back with the patent numbers behind it.
Try EurekaAnchor documents and the most-cited prior art
WO2006066175A1 — RFID tag with modifiable and reversible read range
RFID tag in which the read range can be reversibly modified. Read range control update information is received in a radio frequency (RF) signal. The information is used to control a read range of an antenna. The read range of the antenna can be increased or decreased, for example, by changing an impedance of the antenna.Filed by Intel Corporation, this record sits squarely in the read-range control claim territory that anchors much of the surrounding art.
| # | Publication no. | Patent title | Citations |
|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | US20070152829A1 | Reversibly deactivating a radio frequency identification data tag | 878 |
| 2 | US20140061306A1 | Pairing method for wireless scanner via RFID | 826 |
| 3 | US20200410177A1 | RFID identification systems for surgical instruments | 726 |
| 4 | US20050242950A1 | Activating a data tag by load or orientation or user control | 679 |
| 5 | US6232870B1 | Applications for radio frequency identification systems | 657 |
| 6 | US9953193B2 | Operating systems for an RFID tag | 635 |
| 7 | US20200405439A1 | Surgical system with RFID tags for updating motor assembly parameters | 623 |
| 8 | US20200405437A1 | Surgical instrument comprising an RFID system for tracking a movable component | 537 |
| 9 | US20200405438A1 | Surgical instrument comprising an aligned RFID sensor | 510 |
| 10 | US7948381B2 | Reversibly deactivating a radio frequency identification data tag | 500 |
Citation counts accumulate over time and favour older filings; read them as markers of influence on later claim drafting, not as a signal of which technology is currently most active.
Each row carries its publication number; clicking a row searches Eureka by that number.
Put your own technology through the same analysis
Eureka on the web
When you want the answer in the next five minutes.
The agent works the prompt against patents and technical literature, citing every source.
Run your analysis now →MCP server & REST API
When it has to run inside your own pipeline.
Patent search, landscape analysis and assignee resolution as MCP tools. Drop them into any agent framework, or call REST directly.
Browse MCP servers →What the numbers mean for a filing decision
Three patterns worth acting on before drafting or licensing in this space.
The growth phase is behind this field
Filing peaked in 2019 at 141 families and has trended down since, with 2022's midpoint at 76. Even allowing for publication lag understating 2025-2026, the trajectory is a decline from a plateau, not an emerging technology curve.
Named leaders have gone quiet
Multiple assignees that built substantial portfolios show zero new families in the latest year, and the one assignee still filing is down 67% year-on-year. This reads as consolidation of existing claim positions rather than continued land-grabbing.
Data recognition claims dominate the corpus
Nearly the entire dataset touches G06K (data recognition and presentation), while antenna-specific claims under H01Q sit at 421 and transmission at 555. The imbalance suggests hardware-level antenna and RF-transmission claims are comparatively less crowded than tag-logic and identification-method claims.
US-first filing strategy dominates
The United States leads as receiving office by a wide margin, with Europe, the PCT route and China trailing. A filing strategy built around US priority followed by PCT and EPO extension matches the pattern already visible in this corpus.
Eureka can read the same corpus for gaps instead of for coverage: under-claimed branches adjacent to rfid and nfc systems, with the prior art for and against each one.
Who holds the ground, and who has stopped adding to it
The assignee ranking is dominated by names that built large positions years ago; recent-year momentum tells a different story from cumulative volume.
Even the active filer is slowing
The one assignee still adding families in the latest year is filing at roughly a third of its prior-year pace. No assignee in the momentum data shows growth.
Security and sensing partners co-file most
The strongest co-assignee pairing in the dataset links a sensor-electronics firm with a fire-and-security specialist, consistent with RFID's role in access control and asset tracking rather than pure identification.
A mature, moderately sized field
At under 3,000 families across more than a decade, this is a defined rather than sprawling technology area — dense enough at the core (G06K) that new claims need real differentiation to clear prior art.
| Assignee | Recent year | YoY |
|---|---|---|
| Fortis Inc. | 2 | -67% |
| 3M Innovative Properties Company | 0 | — |
| Sensormatic Electronics | 0 | — |
| Symbol Technologies | 0 | — |
| Avery Dennison Corporation | 0 | — |
| TEGO INC | 0 | — |
| Avery Dennison Retail Information Services | 0 | -100% |
| MEPS REAL TIME | 0 | — |
Where to take this analysis
The filing and assignee patterns above point to specific next steps depending on whether the goal is freedom-to-operate, licensing or new filing strategy.
Run a freedom-to-operate check against the G06K core
Given how concentrated data-recognition claims are, any new tag-identification method should be checked against the densest part of this corpus before drafting.
Explore RFID claim landscapes in EurekaWatch dormant assignees for licensing signals
Several large historical filers show zero recent activity — a pattern worth monitoring for portfolio sales, licensing openings or expiring exclusivity.
Track assignee activity in EurekaEvaluate antenna and energy-harvesting claim gaps
H01Q and energy-harvesting tag claims sit well below the G06K volume, suggesting more room for differentiated hardware-level filings.
Search white space in EurekaCommon questions about RFID and NFC patents
No, not based on filing trends. Families peaked at 141 in 2019, dropped to a midpoint of 76 by 2022, and stand at a partial 7 for 2026. Even accounting for the roughly 18-month lag between filing and publication that understates the most recent year, the overall shape is a plateau followed by decline rather than continued growth. New entrants should expect to compete for space in a field where core claim territory, particularly around data recognition methods, is already dense.
Cumulative portfolio size and current-year activity tell different stories. Several assignees that built large historical portfolios show zero families in the latest year, and the assignee still filing in the most recent period is down 67% year-on-year. This suggests the field's largest historical filers are consolidating existing positions rather than actively expanding them, so a ranking based purely on total family count can mislead about who is currently active.
The clearest signal is the gap between IPC subclasses: G06K (data recognition) touches nearly the entire corpus at 2,646 of 2,807 records, while H01Q (antennas, 421) and transmission-related H04B (555) are comparatively thin. Specific technical terms in the search — chipless tag encoding, antenna detuning compensation, and energy harvesting tag power management — point to sub-areas that appear in the claim language but have not attracted the same filing density as core tag-identification methods.
WO2006066175A1, assigned to Intel Corporation, claims an RFID tag whose read range can be reversibly modified via an RF control signal that adjusts antenna impedance. Anyone drafting claims around dynamic or remotely adjustable read-range control in an RFID tag should review this record and its citing family, since it sits at the center of the read-range control claim territory this corpus tracks. It does not block static-range tag designs or anti-collision methods that do not involve impedance-based range adjustment.
The United States leads as receiving office with 1,138 filings, followed by the European Patent Office at 563, the WIPO/PCT route at 296, China at 139, Canada at 103 and Austria at 98. This distribution suggests a common strategy of establishing US priority before extending internationally via PCT and EPO filings, with China representing a comparatively smaller share of filing activity relative to the corpus's overall size.
Research RFID and NFC Systems in depth with Eureka
Go past this page: query the whole rfid and nfc systems corpus yourself, in your own scope.
Every answer comes back with patent numbers you can open.
Disclaimer. This page is generated from Patsnap Eureka data drawn from a limited snapshot of global patent and scientific-literature records, and is provided for general information and reference only.
Patent data carries inherent limitations: recent filings (typically the most recent 18–24 months) are under-counted due to standard publication lag; counts may be reported at either a patent-family or a patent-record basis and are not always directly comparable; classification, applicant-name, and citation data may contain errors, duplicates, or omissions; and the underlying search query defines and constrains the scope shown. As a result, the analysis may be incomplete or inaccurate and may not reflect the full technology landscape.
Nothing on this page constitutes an exhaustive prior-art, novelty, freedom-to-operate, or validity search, nor does it constitute legal, financial, investment, or professional advice, and it should not be relied upon as such. Any patent, commercial, or strategic decision should be verified independently and reviewed with qualified patent, legal, and domain professionals. Patsnap makes no warranties, express or implied, as to the accuracy, completeness, or fitness for any particular purpose of the information presented.
Machine translation. Assignee and organisation names originally recorded in Chinese, Japanese or Korean have been rendered into English by an AI translation step so that the tables stay readable. These renderings are best-effort and may not match a company’s registered English name; the original name is what the underlying patent record carries, and it is what any Eureka query launched from this page uses.